C4S/GT3

I'll be at Goodwood to see it's launch - stay tuned

http://www.worldcarfans.com/11006152...wood-announced

cfjan

Very interesting stuff.. more info on the MP4-12C:

http://blogs.insideline.com/straight...alkaround.html

Z-bar on the rear.. interesting!

Carrera GT

I guess "Z bar" sounds better than "squat rod" ...

The idea of the hydraulic sways is an Australian invention by "Kinetic" which was ready to go into production in the late 80's.

I saw a demo of it back then on an off-road vehicle (aka 4WD or SUV.) It was astonishing to see the wheel travel they'd achieved (the wheel was suspended by a hydraulic strut that double duty as damper and spring.)

The basic idea is simple: if both wheel "springs" on one side are being compressed, then the car is "rolling." If only one spring is being compressed, then it's a bump. The rule is simple: two springs move on one side: resist; one spring moves, comply. This is built into valve settings and is an entirely passive technology.

By introducing electronically controlled valves, the system can be more intelligent (and infinitely variable, to the point of the rear wheels "learning" from what the front wheels encounter ... and the front wheels "anticipate" based on what cameras "see" ahead with measurement sensors immediately ahead of each tire ...)

The passive hydraulic system would revolutionize 4WD performance. The active system would make off-road or on-road racers (or luxury or sports vehicles) capable of the seemingly impossible. Imagine the advantages in an off-road vehicle that could limp home keeping its weight on three wheels to take weight off a deflate tire? Imagine the traction advantages of a vehicle that could deliberately put equal downforce on each tire, or cooperate with traction control systems and rolling tire inflation to identify wheels with less downforce, being more likely to lose traction, adjusting the cabin to be comfortably horizontal on a side-hill traverse or even an off-road racer capable of jumping or absorbing ramps that would otherwise cause unwanted jumps and worse case, being able to fully extended itself to land with maximum absorption, staying straight and level at speed, "leaning" into turns and so on. Baha would become rather less dramatic.

Some big company or other bought the company and the technology was "delayed" (conspiracy theories abound) but there were seemingly legit rumors of military applications and exiting suspension OEMs not too happy about the thought of cars being built with a simple, cheap, passive hydraulic system that required no springs or dampers or sways, could carry more than any leaf spring and yet be more compliant than any coil or air spring, would practically never wear out, never need service, etc.

Here's the company, TEN, that apparently owns the Kinetic patents now:

http://www.tenneco.com/News/Archive/257/index.html

911SLOW

Very interesting but self leveling suspension was introduced in the Citroen DS in 1950 and later adopted by Rolls-Royce who borrowed the hydro-pneumatic system from Citroen to fit to the rear axle of the Silver Shadow in 1966.
The DS could be driven in three wheels. My father owns a DS with the latest 2.4 motor bought new in 1972. That car was sooo ahead of its time.

John

Carrera GT

The Citroens were amazing. You could tell how long they'd been parked by how close the bum was to the road as the air leaked out of the rear. : ) Some of those innovators in the 60's and 70's really were not held back by the engineering and manufacturing of the day. How'd did we get to where we are today? What went wrong?

droy3

...so true...my take is that the bean counters took over (e.g. MB). Having worked in high tech for years, I'm constantly reminded by the penny pinchers that there's no correlation between R&D and future earnings. Worse yet, engineers and project managers say the same. My take is that pure science initiatives have been abandoned for engineering evolution, where the bean counters can count earnings prematurely and limit spending..and liability...the natural evolution of which is limited new discoveries and new technologies. Imagine if these same individuals were in charge of NASA 4 decades ago...sad...

911SLOW

Ha you got that right about the DS!

Frankly I don't know but I would say money (we blame them for the 99,9% of our problems so why not for this one as well.)

When I was studying I remember reading articles and books describing how 2 engineers or 2 mechanics came up with this and with that and how they presented it to their boss how it was accepted and putted in production in a matter of months or even weeks. They dared, they did.

Now they are so f*ucked up that they actually plan what they are going to "invent" and implement in their cars years ahead and their creativity is questionable and monotonous: save the planet, CO2 busting machines, new battery, new software, Iphone Icar etc.

I still have tons of articles from L. J. K. Setright to read about them and their triumphs and even for Porsche you can see and feel that in Ludvigsen's Excellence was Expected but that’s about it.

Anyway maybe something will change I don't know.

superquant

I saw the MP4-12C today at the presentation in NYC. It was very impressive. The looks are a little sedate for such a high performance car (save the doors) but it does seem well thought out. Nice interior too. The carbon monocell causes the door sills to be pretty high and wide, several people had trouble getting in and out, but once you are ensconced inside it all looks good and is comfortable.

With 2866lb dry weight and 594hp this car should be a rocket ship .. and at a 225-250k price it will be competitive with the usual suspects. The customer experience was also quite refreshing, McLaren will genuinely try very hard to earn new customer business without the attitude I think. Well worth keeping an eye out.

Some pictures below

C.J. Ichiban

great pics! thanks. I'm excited

Jon70

I love it. I am hoping they eventually release a 'high downforce' package like they included with the F1 LM and had as an option for the F1.

Carrera GT

At Pebble Beach this year, their national sales person seemed quite sure that the product plan included more aggressive versions after the first adopters got their fill. The options already count over $100K, so while the door charge is US$239K (at present) once the order includes all the things that make the car, the buyer is writing a check well north of $300K.

PogueMoHone

^
Get the real deal and get a CGT. The MP4 12C is a poor man's copy in many many ways. While it may be an adequate car (for its class), it will never rival the CGT since the copy can never equal the original...and those doors are such an engineering compromise to avoid costs. While they allow for a lower cost solution they greatly limit ingress/egress. They are an attempt to save money, their monocoque chassis is not strong enough to take regular hinges (in regular places), so they had to mount them (hinges) higher to compensate?

In many ways it is disappointing since McLaren had a clean sheet of paper they chose to blatantly copy many design elements of the CGT .... a true Supercar Company should be able to do better. Waiting with baited breath to see what the performance will be like compared to the RS GT2 which, maybe not coincidentally, just reaches beyond the CGT. Is that payback?

Or will McLaren 'blow the doors" off? Early signs are not that positive but it is the results which count (imo)!

C.J. Ichiban

well pogue I'm in a predicament...you see I've already got the CGT and that's not going anywhere...and I've already got a 3RS...and although I really like the 458 and the 430 scud and the 599GTO...I think this one will be the most useful for me- at my current status what would you recommend? I mean out of all of these my favorite thing to do is still driving open wheel cars- but that's another story...

but I trust your judgement- you've been very wise on this board- what should I do if I'm leaning at a 200k-350k car for my next big acquisition?

PogueMoHone

^
Now you know what keeps me up at night!

I couldn't presume to make your decision for you.... curve ball, fast ball or knuckle ball... if it results in a strike then it is the right choice. And I didn't even introduce the slider yet!

I do have thoughts on all of the above cars and know which one holds more immediate appeal for me. However, billions of $$$$s have been spent on automotive marketing and everyone's psyche is tweaked a little differently as a result. What is nuance to one may be lost on another.

Some want the latest and greatest.

Some want power, raw power

Some want a chick magnet

Some want bragging rights

And most are just plain fickle, like me!

So it comes down to your tolerance for automotive pain (read $$$$)

However, I am breaking the three cars down as follows:-

Porsche GT2 RS

Many have long complained that Porsche was losing out to the competition and losing the HP wars; along comes the GT2 RS and suddenly it is over-priced blah, blah, blah. To my mind, it is the zenith of the current 911, extremely limited in production and a natural complement to the Carrera GT and GT3 RS. Capable as a daily driver since the power is available at lower RPM (but maybe too much power!). It is proven and reliable.

F458

Ferrari represents the most challenging purchase right now, because of the past. The F458 is evolutionary (no more F1 that they previously touted....yes, I know they are calling the Dual clutch F1) and controversial in styling. Part brilliant (sides and rear) and part downright ugly (front). When they dictated F1, and the economy was booming their limited production and value retention made it an easy decision for many to rationalize. Today, they find themselves with extra capacity and falling demand, though many haven't yet got the message and that doesn't bode well for future values. Also, Ferrari customer service... well, there really isn't any. For problems "goodwill" is not a word they understand. Their attitude is "its a Ferrari, of course you pay". That said, the cars are very reliable, at least the F430 is, and the current F458 would make for a good daily driver....it has a PDK variant and is HP limited , good ingress and egress. Ironic to think of a F458 as a daily driver and limited HP (compared to the GT2 RS HP, that is)

MP4 12C

This car is both appealing and disappointing. It promises a lot of new technology, but I don't see it, and what I do see is mostly evolutionary. The most impressive thing I saw was the pre-loading for the pedal shifter. However, since it is a brand new platform (copied from the CGT) the driving experience has yet to be appreciated. I wait with baited breath.

McLaren is also smart to tout the whole ownership experience, targeting Ferrari's particular weak point. However, that Dealers are already trying to gouge on pricing for the early cars doesn't bode well for success in that arena. If they can't control the Dealers out of the box they won't get control at a future date. And no Dealer with small volume sales is going to underwrite "goodwill" for the Customer.

From what I see McLaren has to lift their game, and their initial effort may be falling short of the Competition. Since production will be extremely limited, it might make for the best initial financial proposition..but that wouldn't be my reason for buying it. Flipping is not something I do, and there is never a free lunch.

The McLaren is the least usable of the 3 on a daily basis, mainly due to that ingress/egress and while the doors are an initial WOW factor, I think they will get old very quickly...but if you are not driving it every day!

Summary

The above are some of my thoughts about the respective cars, and I am mulling my way through the process. At the end of the day, I'd like to think that I'd make a decision for "practical" reasons as opposed to succumbing to the "glitz and glamor".

I think a good starting point though is to try and figure out which of the above cars you would want alongside the GT2 RS..and then ask yourself, could that choice really be a replacement for the GT2 RS?

Then there is that slider! Oh it never ends...more nights of sleeplessness.

carrering

i think someone at mclaren is a big trekkie. with the doors open, the cockpit controls and displays, and that logo, this thing needs NCC1701 for a license plate. I like the car, but to me it reeks much of an early 90's view of what the future sports car would look like.